Is Reconstructionism part of Reformed Theology?

Discussions of God's covenants with His people.

Is Reconstructionism part of Reformed Theology?

DrWhofan1
RTI Guru
RTI Guru
Joined: 20 Oct 2014, 22:14

08 Feb 2017, 14:18 #1

Is Reconstructionism part of Reformed Theology?
As that movement seems to be associated with more reformed viewpoints.

[mod]Moderator Note:
Please do not create a thread title that is accompanied by a post that does not include the substance of the thread title. A person reading a quote of your opening post would be confused when it only contains "As that movement seems....etc". The reader would wonder what "that movement" refers to. I have edited your opening post accordingly. Thread titles should never be mere introductory clauses to a sentence completed in the opening post accompanying the thread title.
[/mod]
Reply

Ask Mr. Religion
Site Founder
Site Founder
Joined: 28 Jul 2008, 09:13

08 Feb 2017, 15:59 #2

DrWhofan1:25920 wrote:Is Reconstructionism part of Reformed Theology?
As that movement seems to be associated with more reformed viewpoints.
What and who have you read related to Christian Reconstructionism?

How and where do you draw a connection between what you have read and the traditional Reformed historical confessions?

Let's first see what you have thought out as an answer to your own question.

If you want to know what is Reformed theology, read and study the Westminster Standards, Helvetic, Belgic or Heidelberg confessions. Then you can post a question that ties what you have read in the confessions to your topic.

I am growing increasingly impatient with your frequent questions, "Is this or that Reformed theology?" The site is not a vending machine. I do not generally mind questions. I do mind them when they are asked far more frequently than the average person. You ask too many. Why? Because you do not study deeply and often. Unfortunately, we enable this behavior by answering all the questions that just pop into your head. For you, it is better to just jump in the site and ask a question than it is to dig into the resources you have available to you and discover the answers you are seeking.

After you have spent real effort at trying to determine an answer to a question in your mind, and are unable to settle the question, then perhaps it is time to ask it to a broader audience. When you do, include some background about what is leading you to ask the question.
AMR (a.k.a. Patrick)
Do You Confess?
Faculty PRBS
My Randomata Blog
Reply

DrWhofan1
RTI Guru
RTI Guru
Joined: 20 Oct 2014, 22:14

08 Feb 2017, 20:09 #3

Ask Mr. Religion:25922 wrote:
DrWhofan1:25920 wrote:Is Reconstructionism part of Reformed Theology?
As that movement seems to be associated with more reformed viewpoints.
What and who have you read related to Christian Reconstructionism?

How and where do you draw a connection between what you have read and the traditional Reformed historical confessions?

Let's first see what you have thought out as an answer to your own question.

If you want to know what is Reformed theology, read and study the Westminster Standards, Helvetic, Belgic or Heidelberg confessions. Then you can post a question that ties what you have read in the confessions to your topic.

I am growing increasingly impatient with your frequent questions, "Is this or that Reformed theology?" The site is not a vending machine. I do not generally mind questions. I do mind them when they are asked far more frequently than the average person. You ask too many. Why? Because you do not study deeply and often. Unfortunately, we enable this behavior by answering all the questions that just pop into your head. For you, it is better to just jump in the site and ask a question than it is to dig into the resources you have available to you and discover the answers you are seeking.

After you have spent real effort at trying to determine an answer to a question in your mind, and are unable to settle the question, then perhaps it is time to ask it to a broader audience. When you do, include some background about what is leading you to ask the question.
.

have read some material in the past under believe the author was Rishdoney, and he seemed to be implying that God expects and requires us to take the law as God gave it to israel, and have that rule placed upon the USA now. He seemed to be coming out of a reformed viewpoint, as normally those not regormed would not be linking the Mosaic law to us today in that fashion.
Reply

Ask Mr. Religion
Site Founder
Site Founder
Joined: 28 Jul 2008, 09:13

08 Feb 2017, 20:41 #4

DrWhofan1:25924 wrote: have read some material in the past under believe the author was Rishdoney, and he seemed to be implying that God expects and requires us to take the law as God gave it to israel, and have that rule placed upon the USA now. He seemed to be coming out of a reformed viewpoint, as normally those not regormed would not be linking the Mosaic law to us today in that fashion.
We have discussed this often: Please take more care in your posts as relates to grammar. It is unfair to the readers to have to frequently parse your posts in order to properly understand them. Was it really too difficult for you to have crafted your post as follows:
  • I have read some material in the past and believe the author was Rushdooney. He seemed to be implying that God expects and requires us to take the law as God gave it to Israel, and have that rule placed upon the USA now. He seemed to be coming out of a Reformed viewpoint, as normally those not Reformed would not be linking the Mosaic law to us today in that fashion.
I believe you have told me in the past that English is not your second language, so I am not going to wink at your frequent butchery of our language. There is no need to be so careless. It is disrespectful to the readers. Take special care using your tablet, smart phone, computer or whatever when making posts.

I have to question your statement that you have read material and "believe the author" was Rushdooney. No one reads what Rushdooney has written and not know he wrote it. I think you are being fast and loose with the facts of the matter in hopes of getting past my earlier request that you pose questions with some substance behind the questions.
AMR (a.k.a. Patrick)
Do You Confess?
Faculty PRBS
My Randomata Blog
Reply

Ask Mr. Religion
Site Founder
Site Founder
Joined: 28 Jul 2008, 09:13

08 Feb 2017, 20:53 #5

Just because someone who is Reformed makes some statements about this or that concerning Scripture, in no way necessarily implies that what they have written is to be taken as part and parcel historical Reformed theology.

Rushdooney rejects the covenant of works, so there is that issue with actual historical Reformed theology...for starters. ;) Read him if you are interested in sub-Reformed ethical and social theories related to what is called Reconstructionism. He was a brilliant fellow, but quite the quirky one. His systematic is worth a read, but not one recommended as a proper introduction to solid Reformed doctrines.
AMR (a.k.a. Patrick)
Do You Confess?
Faculty PRBS
My Randomata Blog
Reply

larry joseph pearson
Invested Member
Invested Member
Joined: 12 Oct 2011, 20:44

09 Feb 2017, 00:41 #6

Hello Dr.Whofan1, The Reconstructionist movement was given impetus by Rousas John Rushdoony by publication of his " magnum opos" The Institutes of Biblical Law in 1973 by The Craig Press. He modeled it after Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion. Rushdoony started the Chalcedon Foundation now run by his son Mark. Another Reconstruction site is American Vision began in 1978 by Steve Schiffman.

These persons and their followers are the antipodes of historical Reformed theology. I posted this so in your investigation you may see the chasm that exits between Reformed theology and persons that call themselves Calvinists in the Reconstruction Movement. I only enclosed this in case you wanted to investigate further. There are others in this movement that I have failed to mention. God bless you!



:think:
Reply

DrWhofan1
RTI Guru
RTI Guru
Joined: 20 Oct 2014, 22:14

09 Feb 2017, 13:47 #7

Ask Mr. Religion:25927 wrote:Just because someone who is Reformed makes some statements about this or that concerning Scripture, in no way necessarily implies that what they have written is to be taken as part and parcel historical Reformed theology.

Rushdooney rejects the covenant of works, so there is that issue with actual historical Reformed theology...for starters. ;) Read him if you are interested in sub-Reformed ethical and social theories related to what is called Reconstructionism. He was a brilliant fellow, but quite the quirky one. His systematic is worth a read, but not one recommended as a proper introduction to solid Reformed doctrines.
He rejeted the reformed Covenant of Works, so would that mean that he viewed the Mosaic Law given to israel as not being just for the Old Covenant era, but to be the Law God gave to regulate morality and to apply to all nations since then? That would seem to be a theoracy, is that all those in his movement would term it being?

This concept seems to be akin to what was introduced to while in Charasmatic circles, Gary Demarr and His reduction of Christianity, as he also afgued for something like a post mil view that woulkd have th Law and God standards mandated i all nations, especially here in the USA?
Reply